[Tubby Isaacs]

The Telegraph has a punchable thick-as-shit nobhead called Nile Gardiner. His stock article involves "Obama's plunging ratings". Ratings don't have to be actually plunging or anything.

Seems like we've got a load of Gardiner's in our media. Certainly, if Comment is Free is anything to go by. So I thought I'd start a thread. Guess which London paper which comes out in the evening provided the first example?

"Labour languishes in the polls" opined one of those snappy columns with no room for a byeline.

Does it fuck.

http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/uk-polling-report-average" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I just know the person from the Standard would reply with "But they should be 20 points ahead!" or "Even his brother doesn't like him!"

[new puritan]

I don't rate Ed Miliband particularly highly, but the recent reporting on Labour's poll ratings does irk me a bit. To be consistently nudging 40% two years after a disastrous GE showing (having led the Tories for almost the whole of the subsequent period) doesn't seem to me to be too bad. I find it hard to believe people genuinely think Labour should be romping ahead in the polls at this stage - or that they would be under David Miliband, for that matter.

The fact that it attracts so much media attention when the Tories do manage to scrape a poll lead says a lot, I think. Unfortunately it seems to have become received wisdom that no matter what he says or does, Ed is crap and I don't know if he'll ever be able to shake that perception off. A lot of the flak seems to be coming from disgruntled bitter Blairites like Dan Hodges who have an axe to grind and can't get over the fact their man lost fair and square, despite massively outspending his brother during the leadership campaign.

[mattomac]

The odd thing is there is this idea that they should have taken 8-12% of the Tories but why? Labour have taken 3-4% off them which they've made up in UKIP votes (Since the Veto that never was a veto) and Tories who voted Lib Dems but now see no need to do so. Why would Tories who voted Tory turn to Labour so soon into a Tory governement, they voted for this and got this. Maybe when the NHS reform takes it's toll then a sea change may happen, the economy which was Labour's fault in the past has now become the fault of the Eurozone.

The Lib Dems got a kicking as they pretended to be the party of the left (And let's be honest they did) and they will continue to get that for the next few years, Salmond up in Scotland has set 2014 for a reason as the Tories aren't that unpopular as of yet they have largerly deflected the worsening economy, the NHS reform hasn't happened and the cuts to higher education haven't taken effect (Yes Scotland won't feel the latter but they will see it, if they see the UK being dragged down by Westminster or feel a perception of that then they will vote yes to independence, regardless of that poll last week a vote for Independence would fall at this time it got a bounce because of the headlines at the time).

[satnav]

At a time when the economy is flat-lining, unemployment is rising,the NHS reforms are in trouble, and Britain is increasingly isolated in Europe all the right wing commentators seem to have become totally obsessed with the leader of the opposition.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Ed Milliband's party now languishing with a 5 point lead.

http://labs.yougov.co.uk/news/2012/02/0 ... our-lead-5" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Of course, in the real world he's 20 points behind because he should be doing so much better.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Now that the terrible spectre of Len Mccluskey taking us back to the seventies, Labour have collapsed.

http://labs.yougov.co.uk/news/2012/03/0 ... ur-lead-5/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Yep, still 5 points ahead.

[oboogie]

Now that the terrible spectre of Len Mccluskey taking us back to the seventies, Labour have collapsed.

http://labs.yougov.co.uk/news/2012/03/0 ... ur-lead-5/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Yep, still 5 points ahead.

I am surprised and disappointed that Labour aren't further ahead in the polls. Does it indicate that there are an awful lot of people out there who look at this vile, incompetent government and want more of the same? Or is it the failure of Labour to get it's message across?

NB I'm obviously fully aware that we have a right-wing, pro-Tory media (the power of Dacre's et al's drip), but even they can't hide the bare facts that our services are being stolen from under our noses, unemployment is rising and standards of living are falling.

[Kreuzberger]

Now that the terrible spectre of Len Mccluskey taking us back to the seventies, Labour have collapsed.

http://labs.yougov.co.uk/news/2012/03/0 ... ur-lead-5/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Yep, still 5 points ahead.

I am surprised and disappointed that Labour aren't further ahead in the polls. Does it indicate that there are an awful lot of people out there who look at this vile, incompetent government and want more of the same? Or is it the failure of Labour to get it's message across?

NB I'm obviously fully aware that we have a right-wing, pro-Tory media (the power of Dacre's et al's drip), but even they can't hide the bare facts that our services are being stolen from under our noses, unemployment is rising and standards of living are falling.

I should perhaps delve deeper in to some of these numbers before making comment but, from what I have seen so far, it looks like the balance of power is going to be held by swing voters and the un-voted. Of course, swing voters have always had a disproportionately loud voice (especially when things are close) but my view is that the younger demographics will come to the fore in 2015.

Those who have never before voted, those whose engagement with the political process is, at best, distanced and apathetic and those who, fortunately, cannot be effectively reached through traditional media.

The encouraging fact for me is that the Tory party's cheerleaders haven't the faintest idea how to engage with this demographic with one possible exception being Murdoch's Sun. Of all the traditional media-owners, he must again be seen as the wild card. And, perhaps more so than even in recent years assuming, of course, that he does actually see his 85th birthday and/or isn't forced to retire.

He owes the Tories nothing already. Quite the opposite (BSkyB) and Leveson will surely see them become even further over-drawn - after all, the inquiry hasn't just happened on their watch, it was set up by Cameron himself.

You could argue that there is already precedent. He has backed the SNP in Scotland and only time will tell whether that is because he senses a popular mood or because he is trying to aid the Tories' cause by removing the Scots MP's from the Westminster equation. Let's remember though, that Murdoch is not driven by ideology. He is driven by profit.

Back to the yoof he can't reach. Fewer of them than ever consumer press and TV news. Their "news", if you can call it that, is peer-reviewed information that is spread like hyper-gossip across social media and it respects no standardisation or categorisation. Gigs, workfare, pictures of cats, war - it's all part of the one conversation and I believe that Labour have to redouble their efforts if they are to get their message across.

More than that, they need to understand that one of their demographics of greatest potential couldn't just simply do it for them but also amplify it and give it greater credibility through word-of-mouse.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Latest polls:

Tory 36
Lab 43
LD 9

Cue David Milliband saying Labour needs to be humble about its mistakes in office. Yep, no campaigning or anything like that. Media navel gazing, that's the way to do it.

[new puritan]

Latest polls:

Tory 36
Lab 43
LD 9

Cue David Milliband saying Labour needs to be humble about its mistakes in office. Yep, no campaigning or anything like that. Media navel gazing, that's the way to do it.

I don't know if you read Labour Uncut (I try to steer clear of it most of the time but it has a certain car-crash quality), but Ed Miliband's none-more-moderate social democracy has really got them frothing. You'd think he was some sort of Trot insurgent from the way they go on. Their rose-tinted view of the Tories and Cameron in particular is just bizarre - they're still at the same level they were at the 2010 election ffs.

http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2012/03/09/ho ... e-deficit/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This shift is the legacy of not being in the economic game. As a party we’ve not got past square one with voters.

Ed Miliband’s monstering by the mob was the inevitable result of our terminal loss of economic credibility. Beyond questions about his personal style, the lack of policy substance on the issue that matters most to voters is what truly diminishes a leader.

And all because of a simple misunderstanding.

On the deficit, the public aren’t particularly interested in Labour’s rational economic proposals for growth. They want emotional reassurance that what they see as the cause of the problems won’t happen again.

Until the party is prepared to offer that, the leader’s team had best cancel any more of those events with a live audience.

It's hard to see the deficit being the defining issue in 2015, unless Osborne's efforts to reduce it are a total flop. It's an abstract concern - from day to day people are more bothered about health, energy prices, housing and employment. If Miliband can gain the voters' trust on those issues he'll be in with a shout.

[Malcolm Armsteen]

Labour Uncut deserves its own thread...

[Tubby Isaacs]

Christ, I wish I hadn't looked at that. Someone called Jasmine Merryweather is right in there with "sold off our gold" and "nanny knows best".

[visage]

Wasnt the oft quoted gold sell off actually quite minor in its impact?

[Tubby Isaacs]

It was major if you assume he should have known when the peak price was. Like of course everyone who mentions it would have done. As someone said, George Osborne has cost us a fortune by not buying all the gold he could in May 2010.

There is a fair bit of gold unsold.

This is good:

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/5788dbac-7680 ... z1p72SDKse" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[new puritan]

Sure enough, no sooner have Labour built up what looks like a fairly solid lead in the polls than Dan Hodges surfaces from the depths to shit-stir. The sooner all the other Blairites do a Luke Bozier, the better.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danho ... lent-coup/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Last week I spoke to a shadow cabinet member with close ties to the unions. “They’re not messing around this time”, he said, “McCluskey is going to try and take over the whole show.” He may well do. Assuming there’s a show left to take over.

On Monday a meeting was held at Labour’s soon-to-be-vacated Victoria Street headquarters to which staff were informed of the latest stage of the party’s internal reorganisation. Descriptions of the event range from “disaster”, through “multi-lane pile-up”, to “carnage”. “I’ve never in all my life seen anything like it,” said one shocked observer. “Normally people are quite restrained. But it all came pouring out”.

One cause of the disharmony was the news that the various new directorships established to manage the party’s operations are to be filled by members of Ed Miliband’s existing staff. “It’s a pretty blatant and characteristically ham-fisted power grab,” said one union source. Then there was the announcement that a new Executive Board has been established, which will be headed by Charles Allen, former ITV chief executive, effectively downgrading the newly appointed general secretary Iain McNicol; “Iain’s been made deputy general secretary,” said a movement insider. This was then followed by the revelation that having run a balanced budget for the proceeding two years, in 2011 Labour managed to overspend to the tune of £1.7 million.

Finally came the admission from McNicol and Ed Miliband’s chief of staff Tim Livesey that Labour had “no strategic direction”. The statement itself came as news to no one. But what unleashed a cascade of opprobrium was the lack of a clear blueprint for actually addressing the problem. “The staff were told, 'don’t worry, there’ll be a new report in a few months' time'. People were jumping up and saying 'A few months? We’ve got mayoral elections, local elections and an independence referendum, and we’re fighting them now,'" said one witness.

It’s this organisational implosion that Len McCluskey is eying from a safe distance. There are four key areas of the party’s operations: campaigns, candidate selection, policy development and constituency development. And the Unite general secretary senses this as his moment to make a play for all of them.